{"id":48167,"date":"2023-03-21T09:58:43","date_gmt":"2023-03-21T09:58:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/?p=48167"},"modified":"2023-04-03T08:07:38","modified_gmt":"2023-04-03T08:07:38","slug":"prevalence-and-antimicrobial-susceptibilities-of-bacteria-isolated-from-circumcised-and-non-circumcised-women-with-urinary-tract-infections-in-different-gynecological-clinics-in-khartoum-locality-sud","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/vol16no1\/prevalence-and-antimicrobial-susceptibilities-of-bacteria-isolated-from-circumcised-and-non-circumcised-women-with-urinary-tract-infections-in-different-gynecological-clinics-in-khartoum-locality-sud\/","title":{"rendered":"Prevalence and Antimicrobial Susceptibilities of Bacteria Isolated from Circumcised and Non-Circumcised Women with Urinary Tract Infections in Different Gynecological Clinics in Khartoum Locality, Sudan"},"content":{"rendered":"

Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n

Urinary tract infections (UTIs) can affect any part of the urinary system, and women are more likely than men to develop UTIs 1<\/sup>. \u00a0Generally, UTIs occur when bacteria enter the urinary tract through the urethra and begin to multiply in the bladder.\u00a0Despite the urinary system’s designed defenses, these can sometimes fail. When\u00a0that happens, bacteria may take hold and grow into a full-blown infection in the urinary tract. Women experience more than one infection during their lifetimes 2<\/sup>. The anatomy of the female urethra is of particular importance to the pathogenesis of UTIs. The female urethra is relatively short compared to the male urethra, and it is situated close to the warm, moist, per rectal region, which is highly populated by microorganisms 1<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

Other risk factors include: sexual activity, certain type of birth control and menopause (after menopause a decline in circulating estrogen causes change in the urinary tract that make women more vulnerable to infection) 2<\/sup>, urinary tract abnormalities (babies born with urinary tract abnormalities), blocking in the urinary tract; as kidney stone, catheterize (people who can\u2019t urinate on their own and use a tube to urinate), urinary procedure (which can be recent urinary surgery or an exam of the urinary tract that involves medical instrument) 3<\/sup>. \u00a0Female genital mutilation (FGM) also known as female genital cutting or female circumcision that don\u2019t allow the urine to leave completely or cause urine to back up in the urethra have an increased risk of UTIs and menstrual problem 4<\/sup>. At least 200 million girls and women alive today have undergone FGM 7<\/sup> living in 30 countries in Africa, the Middle East and Asia where FGM is practiced [8]. The most serious type of FGM is type three that create covering seal and small opening is left for urine and menstrual blood to escape 4<\/sup>. <\/strong>FGM is thought to be a tribal tradition or an Islamic imperative, and several studies have reported the reasons that a girl might undergo FGM include providing her with an honorable social life, preserving her virginity, and allowing her to become a mature woman for a safe marriage 5,6<\/sup><\/p>\n

The overall prevalence of urological complications in women with genital mutilation is 20%. Recurrent urinary tract infections, lower urinary tract symptoms, urinary retention, urogenital fistulas, meatus stenosis, urethral stones, and megaurethra are the reported ones 9<\/sup>. All those risk factors can lead us to recurrent infection and may result in antibiotic resistant bacteria. Also geographic variation in etiologic agents of UTIs and their resistance patterns in antibiotics 10,11<\/sup><\/p>\n

UTIs is the second most common infection presenting in community practice which associated with elevated antibiotic resistance in Sudan 12<\/sup>. Female genital mutilation may be increasing UTIs 5<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

To our knowledge, there are few studies concerning the consequences of circumcision on the urinary system and its risk for increasing antibiotic-resistant bacteria associated with UTIs. So, the ultimate goal of this study is to provide information about this problem which may highlight circumcision and its association with antibiotic-resistant bacteria causing UTIs.<\/p>\n

Methods<\/strong><\/p>\n

This cross-sectional, case-control, hospital-based study\u00a0was conducted in two clinics in Khartoum locality.\u00a0The study was carried out between July 2019 and March 2021. The study included 80 Sudanese women (n=80) with genital mutilation (n=40 case groups) and 40 non-genital mutilated women (n=40 control groups); all of them had UTI symptoms including (pyuria, loin pain, burning micturition, frequency, urinary retention and urgency of urination); and with different ages.<\/p>\n

Ethical considerations<\/strong><\/p>\n

Ethical approval No. (MLS-RB-07-3-18) to conduct this study was obtained from the Scientific Research Committee, Collage of Medical Laboratory Science, Sudan University of Science and Technology and Dan and Nobatia Clinics in Khartoum Locality. Informed consent was obtained from participants before collection of the urine samples.<\/p>\n

Data collection<\/strong><\/p>\n

Data were collected using direct interview the patients, which provided information conceding each case examined.<\/p>\n

Laboratory processing<\/strong><\/p>\n

Specimen collection and processing<\/strong><\/p>\n

The participants collected mid-stream urine specimens in a sterile wide-mouth container after they were informed of the collection procedure, and all specimens were processed within one hour of collection.<\/p>\n

Isolation<\/strong><\/p>\n

Aseptically, and with a 0.005 calibrated loop, a loop full of well-mixed urine was incubated aerobically at 37\u00b0C overnight on blood and Cysteine Lactose Electrolyte Deficient\u00a0 (CLED) agar plates.<\/p>\n

Identification of the isolated bacteria <\/strong><\/p>\n

Identification of the isolated bacteria was done by colonial morphology after assessment of significant bacteriuria (>105 <\/sup>CFU\/1ml of urine), Gram\u2019s stain and conventional biochemical tests.<\/p>\n

Biochemical tests for identification of Grams negative rods<\/strong><\/p>\n

Grams negative rods were identified by conventional Biochemical tests including: (Kligler Iron Agar (KIA), Indole hydrolysis test, Motility test [13]. Citrate utilization test, Oxidase test 14<\/sup> and Urease test 15<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

Biochemical tests for identification Gram positive cocci<\/strong><\/p>\n

All catalase positive Gram positive cocci isolates and suspected to be Staphylococci<\/em> were identified by coagulase test, DNAse test and fermentation on Mannitol salt agar. Suspected Enterococcus<\/em> isolates which were catalase test negative were identified by litmus milk decolonization test and aesculin hydrolysis test 15<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

Susceptibility Testing<\/strong><\/p>\n

Modified Kirby-Bauer susceptibility testing technique <\/strong><\/p>\n

By using a sterile wire loop, 3\u20135 well-isolated, purified and fresh colonies of similar appearance of the tested organism were touched and emulsified in 3\u20134 ml of sterile physiological saline. The turbidity of the suspension was matched to the standard turbidity (0.5% McFarland standard) on good light. Sterile swab was used to inoculate a plate of Mueller Hinton agar. Excess fluid was removed by pressing and rotating the swab against the side of the tube above the level of the suspension. Streaked the swab evenly over the surface of the medium in three directions, rotated the plate approximately 60\u030a to ensure even distribution. With the petri dish lid in place, allowed about 3\u20135minutes (no longer than 15 minutes) for the surface of the agar to dry. By using a sterile forceps, the appropriate antimicrobial discs was placed, evenly distributed on the inoculated plate. After overnight incubation, the plates was examined to ensure the growth was confluent and by a ruler the diameter of each zone of inhibition was measured in mm. The zone sizes of each antimicrobial disc was interpreted by interpretative chart, according to CLSI guidelines 16<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

Statistical analysis<\/strong><\/p>\n

The obtained data from this study was analyzed using statistical package of the social science (SPSS) version 20.0. Frequencies were expressed in form of table and Chi-Square test was used to determine the significant differences at p<\/em>-value \u22640.05.<\/p>\n

Results<\/strong><\/p>\n

A total of 80 urine specimens had been collected as follow: 40 were circumcised and other 40 were not, and their ages ranged from 7 to 70 years old with a mean age of 28.8\u00b1 13.8 S.D. About 16\/40 (40%) of circumcised women were married and 23\/40 (57%) were single, while among non-circumcised group there were 7\/40 (17%) married and 33\/40 (82%) single as in table 1. The growth rate was 34\/40 (85%) among circumcised females and 6\/40 (15%) among non-circumcised participants and there was high statistical difference between circumcision and UTIs (P<\/em>.value=0.001) and circumcised women were 32 times exposed to risk of UTIs than non-circumcised one as showed in table (2). The isolated bacteria were 24\/34 (70.6%) G-ve rods and 10\/34 (29.4%) G+ve cocci among circumcised women, while all isolated bacteria were G-ve rods 6\/6 (100%) and no isolated G+ve cocci among non-circumcised one as displayed in table (3).<\/p>\n

Among the isolated bacteria; Escherichia coli <\/em>was the most predominant isolate among circumcised and non-circumcised women. Circumcised women were 5, 8, 2, and 3 times more susceptible to urinary tract infection with Escherichia coli, K.pneumoniae, Portus mirabilis,<\/em> and Ps<\/em>eudomonas aeruginosa,<\/em> respectively than non-circumcised ones. There was a high association between the isolated organism and circumcised women (P<\/em>. value=0.001) as illustrated in table (4). The all isolated bacteria from circumcised women were highly sensitive to Gentamycin (7\/12 (58.0%)) compared to other antimicrobial agents and in non-circumcised was 100.0% for Gentamycin and Augmentin. Also all isolated G-ve rods in both groups were totally resistant to Nalidixic acid as displayed in table (5) and (6).<\/p>\n

Table 1: Demographic data of the Study population.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Marital status<\/strong><\/td>\nCircumcised women<\/strong><\/td>\nNon\u00a0 circumcised women<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Single<\/td>\n23(57.5%)<\/td>\n33(82.5%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Married<\/td>\n17(42.5%)<\/td>\n7(17 %)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Total<\/strong><\/td>\n40(100%)<\/strong><\/td>\n40(100%)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Age group<\/strong><\/td>\nCircumcised women<\/strong><\/td>\nNon\u00a0 circumcised women<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
0-20yrs<\/td>\n1(2.5%)<\/td>\n16(40%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21-40yrs<\/td>\n29(72.5%)<\/td>\n22(55%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
41-60yrs<\/td>\n8(20%)<\/td>\n2(5%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
61-80yrs<\/td>\n2(5%)<\/td>\n0(0%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Total<\/strong><\/td>\n40(100%)<\/strong><\/td>\n40(100%)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00a0<\/strong>Table 2: Association between circumcision and UTIs.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Growth rate<\/strong><\/td>\nStudy groups<\/strong><\/td>\nO.R <\/strong><\/td>\nP.value<\/em><\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Circumcised women<\/td>\nNon-circumcised women<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Growth<\/strong><\/td>\n34(85%)<\/td>\n6(15%)<\/td>\n <\/p>\n

32.11<\/p>\n

 <\/td>\n

 <\/p>\n

0.001<\/p>\n

 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>No growth<\/strong><\/td>\n6 (15%)<\/td>\n34 (85%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Total<\/strong><\/td>\n40 (100%)<\/td>\n40(100%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00a0<\/strong>Table 3: Association Gram\u2019s reaction of the isolates and study groups.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Isolates<\/strong><\/td>\nStudy groups<\/strong><\/td>\nTotal<\/strong><\/td>\nP. <\/em><\/strong>value<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Circumcised women<\/td>\nNon-circumcised women<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
G-ve rods<\/strong><\/td>\n24 (60.0%)<\/td>\n6 (15.0%)<\/td>\n30 (75.5%)<\/td>\n <\/p>\n

2.35<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

G+ve cocci<\/strong><\/td>\n10 (25.0%)<\/td>\n\u00a00 (0%)<\/td>\n10 (25.0%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Total<\/strong><\/td>\n34 (85.0%)<\/td>\n6 (15.0%)<\/td>\n40 (100.0%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00a0<\/strong>Table 4: Frequency of isolated bacteria among circumcised and non- circumcised women.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Isolated bacteria<\/strong><\/td>\nStudy groups<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

O.R<\/strong><\/td>\n

P. <\/em><\/strong>value<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Circumcised women<\/td>\nNon- circumcised women<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
E.coli<\/em><\/strong><\/td>\n12(35.3%)<\/td>\n3 (50%)<\/td>\n5.11<\/td>\n <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

0.001<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

K.pneumoniae<\/em><\/strong><\/td>\n7 (20.6%)<\/td>\n1(16.7%)<\/td>\n8.27<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Pr.mirabilis<\/em><\/strong><\/td>\n2 (5.9%)<\/td>\n1(16.7%)<\/td>\n2.05<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Ps.aeruginosa<\/em><\/strong><\/td>\n3 (8.8%)<\/td>\n1(16.7%)<\/td>\n3.16<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
S.aureus<\/em><\/strong><\/td>\n1 (2.9%)<\/td>\n0 (0%)<\/td>\n–<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
S.saprophyticus<\/em><\/strong><\/td>\n1 (2.9%)<\/td>\n0 (0%)<\/td>\n–<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
E.faecalis<\/em><\/strong><\/td>\n8 (23.5%)<\/td>\n0 (0%)<\/td>\n–<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Total<\/strong><\/td>\n34\/40 (100.0%)<\/td>\n6 \/40 (100.0%)<\/td>\n–<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00a0<\/strong>Table 5: Antimicrobial susceptibility of isolated bacteria among circumcised women.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Isolates<\/strong><\/p>\n

No. (%)<\/strong><\/td>\n

Antimicrobial susceptibility \u00a0(Sensitive)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Amp<\/td>\nCip<\/td>\nGen<\/td>\nNA<\/td>\nAug<\/td>\nCef<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
E.coli <\/em>(n=12)<\/td>\n5 (41.6%)<\/td>\n4(33%)<\/td>\n7(58%)<\/td>\n0(0%)<\/td>\n62 (50 %)<\/td>\n3 (25%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
K.pneumoniae<\/em><\/p>\n

(n=7)<\/td>\n

2 (28%)<\/td>\n4 (57.1%)<\/td>\n3 (42.8%)<\/td>\n0(0%)<\/td>\n6 (85%)<\/td>\n3 (42.8%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Pr.mirabilis<\/em><\/p>\n

(n=2)<\/td>\n

0 (0%)<\/td>\n1 (50 %)<\/td>\n2(100%)<\/td>\n0(0%)<\/td>\n2(100%)<\/td>\n1(50%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Ps.aeruginosa<\/em><\/p>\n

(n=3)<\/td>\n

0 (0%)<\/td>\n2 (66.6%)<\/td>\n1 (33.3%)<\/td>\n0(0%)<\/td>\n1(33.3%)<\/td>\n\u00a0(0%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
En,faecalis <\/em>(n=8)<\/td>\n2 (25%)<\/td>\n3\/8 (37.5%)<\/td>\n5 (62.5%)<\/td>\n–<\/td>\n5 (62.5%)<\/td>\n3 (37.5%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
S.aureus <\/em>(n=1)<\/td>\n0 (0%)<\/td>\n1 (100%)<\/td>\n1 (100 %)<\/td>\n–<\/td>\n1 (100%)<\/td>\n1 (100%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
S.saprophyticus<\/em><\/p>\n

(n=1)<\/td>\n

1(100%)<\/td>\n1 (100%)<\/td>\n1 (100%)<\/td>\n–<\/td>\n1 (100.0%)<\/td>\n1 (100 %)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Key: Amp=Amoxycillin, Cip= Ciprofloaxacin, Gen= Gentamicin, NA = Nalidixic acid, Aug=Augmentin, and Cef= Cefuroxime<\/p>\n

Table 6: Antimicrobial susceptibility of isolated bacteria among non-circumcised patients.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Antimicrobial agents<\/strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

Isolates<\/strong><\/td>\n

E.coli<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

N0. (%)<\/strong><\/td>\n

K.pneumoniae<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

N0. (%)<\/strong><\/td>\n

Pr.mirabilis <\/em><\/strong>N0. (%)<\/strong><\/td>\nPs.aeruginosa<\/em><\/strong>N0. (%)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Amoxycillin<\/td>\n0 \/3 (0%)<\/td>\n1\/1 (100%)<\/td>\n0\/1 (0%)<\/td>\n0\/1 (0%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Ciprofloxacin<\/td>\n1\/3 (33.3%)<\/td>\n1\/1 (100%)<\/td>\n1\/1 (100%)<\/td>\n1\/1 (100%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Gentamicin<\/td>\n3\/3 (100%)<\/td>\n1\/1 (100%)<\/td>\n1\/1 (100%)<\/td>\n1\/1 (100%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Nalidixic acid<\/td>\n0 \/3 (0%)<\/td>\n1\/1 (100%)<\/td>\n0\/1 (0%)<\/td>\n0\/1 (0%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Augmentin<\/td>\n3\/3 (100%)<\/td>\n1\/1 (100%)<\/td>\n0\/1 (0%)<\/td>\n0\/1 (0%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Cefuroxime<\/td>\n2\/3 (66.6)<\/td>\n1\/1 (100%)<\/td>\n1\/1 (100%)<\/td>\n1\/1 (100%)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00a0<\/strong>Discussion <\/strong><\/p>\n

In this study, the growth rate was 34 (85%) among circumcised women rather than non-circumcised 6 (15%). This result almost confirms the theory of Elduma when he mentioned UTIs as one of the circumcision complications in Sudan\u00a0(2018) 5<\/sup>. \u00a0In the current study,\u00a0the circumcised women were more likely to have and develop UTIs (85%) than the non-circumcised group (15%). This result was similar to that obtained by Amin\u00a0et al<\/em>. (2013) 17<\/sup> in Egypt which reported highly\u00a0significant different types of UTIs by 86.6% of the study group (251 circumcised women participate in the study).<\/p>\n

Gram negative rods isolated more frequently than G+ve cocci in this study, 24\/34 (70.6%) and 10\/34 (29.4%), respectively in circumcised women, Also in non-circumcised women Gram negative rods also grew more frequently than G+ve cocci in 6\/40 (15%) of the cases, but there were no isolated G+ve cocci among circumcised women. This was harmonized to that reported in Sudan by Saeed who found 45(65%) Gram negative bacteria more than Gram positive 24(35%) from 69 of significant growth urine sample 12<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

The present study found the commonest frequent was E. coli <\/em>12(35.3%), (followed by En. faecalis<\/em> 8(23.5%) and K. pneumoniae<\/em> 7(20.6%) among circumcised women, Moreover, while E. coli 3<\/em>(50%) was the most prevalent among non- circumcised women. It was close to the study carried out by Theodore 18<\/sup> in Nigeria who found 141 out of 181 urine specimens and E.coli<\/em> was 47 (33.3%) followed by Klebsiella species<\/em> 28 (19.9%) and 5(3%) En. faecalis<\/em>. Also among non-circumcised females E.coli<\/em> was more predominant than others.<\/p>\n

The isolated bacteria from circumcised women were highly resistant to a number of the antimicrobial agents used, including: Nalidixic acid\u00a0(100%),\u00a0Amoxycillin (70.5%), and cefuroxime\u00a0(64.7%). This was in agreement with a study conducted by Ahmed and colleagues 19<\/sup> in Sudan, in which E.coli<\/em> showed high resistance to amoxicillin, but low resistance to nalidixic acid.\u00a0In non-circumcised women, (83%) were resistant to Nalidixic acid and Amoxycillin, whereas (0%) were resistant to cefuroxime.<\/p>\n

According to our knowledge studies on urinary tract infections in women who undergo genital mutilation are lacking in the literature; and no studies have been conducted to compare these results. In general, circumcised women were more resistant to antimicrobial agents than non-circumcised women. One of the limitation of this study; it was conducted on a limited number of samples.<\/p>\n

Conclusions<\/strong><\/p>\n

UTIs and antimicrobial-resistant bacteria were more prevalent among circumcised women than non-circumcised women. E.coli <\/em>was the most prevalent bacteria among circumcised women followed by En. faecalis <\/em>and K.pneumoniae<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Recommendations<\/strong><\/p>\n

Increase awareness of the population about the risk of female genital mutilation which is a critical health problem. Additional research studies in a broader field, including different areas in Sudan, and using more advanced methods like polymerase chain reaction (PCR) will be necessary. Prevention or decrease of female genital mutilation, which is still a traditional custom in Sudan.<\/p>\n

Conflict of Interests <\/strong><\/p>\n

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.<\/p>\n

Funding Sources<\/strong><\/p>\n

there is no funding sources.<\/p>\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Tille PM. Bailey and Scott\u2019s diagnostic microbiology, 14th <\/sup> Saint Louis: Elsevier; 2017. p. 987-992.<\/li>\n
  2. Hertting O. Urinary Tract Infection Pathogenesis and Complications. Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden: Shannon Wright, .<\/strong> p.1-16.<\/li>\n
  3. Mayo Clinic (2019). Urinary tract infection. https:\/\/www.mayoclinic.org\/diseases-conditions\/urinary-tract-infection\/symptoms-causes\/syc-20353447 (Accessed on 14\/09\/2019, 9.00 p.m.).<\/li>\n
  4. https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Female_genital_mutilation (accessed on 18\/9\/2019, 8.25 p.m).<\/li>\n
  5. Elduma AH. Female genital mutilation in Sudan. Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences. 2018 Feb 15;6(2):430.
    \nCrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  6. Abathun AD, Sundby J, Gele AA. Attitude toward female genital mutilation among Somali and Harari people, Eastern Ethiopia. Int J Women\u2019s Health. 2016;8:557
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  7. Female genital mutilation (FGM). August 2021.<\/li>\n
  8. Female genital mutilation. 21 January 2022.<\/li>\n
  9. Zambon JP, Mihai B, Ivan CA, Magalhaes RS, Karakci A, Zhao S. Urological complications in women with genital mutilation. Clin Med Rep. 2018;1:1-4.
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  10. Gupta K. Emerging antibiotic resistance in urinary tract pathogens. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2003 Jun;17(2):243-59
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  11. Akoachere JF, Yvonne S, Akum NH, Seraphine EN. Etiologic profile and antimicrobial susceptibility of community-acquired urinary tract infection in two Cameroonian towns. BMC Research notes. 2012 Dec;5(1):1-8.
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  12. Saeed A, Hamid SA, Bayoumi M, Shanan S, Alouffi S, Alharbi SA, Alshammari FD, Abd H. Elevated antibiotic resistance of Sudanese urinary tract infection bacteria. EXCLI journal. 2017;16:1073.<\/li>\n
  13. Goldman E, Green LH. The family Enterobacteriaceae. Practical handbook of microbiology, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, New York. 2009:220-222.<\/li>\n
  14. Kumar S. Essentials of Microbiology. JP Medical Ltd; 2015 Nov 30. P.p. 48-55.
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  15. Cheesbrough M. District laboratory practice in tropical countries, part 2. Cambridge University press; 2005. Pp.35-70.
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  16. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. <\/em>(2018) supplement M100, 28th<\/sup> Wayne, PA: 2018.
    \nCrossRef<\/li>\n
  17. Amin MM, Rasheed S, Salem E. Lower urinary tract symptoms following female genital mutilation. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. 2013 Oct 1;123(1):21-3.
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  18. Theodore M. Prevalence of Urinary Tract Infections among prison imamates in Nigeria. The internet Journal of Microbiology. 2006;3(2):4394.
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  19. Ahmed AA, Osman H, Mansour AM, Musa HA, Ahmed AB, Karrar Z, Hassan HS. Antimicrobial agent resistance in bacterial isolates from patients with diarrhea and urinary tract infection in the Sudan. The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene. 2000 Nov 1;63(5-6):259-63.
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Abbreviations<\/strong><\/p>\n

    FGM: Female genital mutilation, UTIs: Urinary tract infections, CLSI: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Introduction Urinary tract infections (UTIs) can affect any part of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[105],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-48167","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-vol16no1"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48167","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=48167"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48167\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":48470,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48167\/revisions\/48470"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48167"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48167"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48167"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}